claims to have a market, and fair, and emends of assize of bread and beer in Wigan. And by what warrant he claims for himself and his men of the same town to be quit of suit to the county and wapentake; and to have a free borough, infangenthef, and utfangenthef, in the said town, privileges which pertain to the crown and dignity of the King, without the licence and will of the King himself and his predecessors, the Kings of England. And Master Adam came and produced two charters, made by the lord Henry, father of the King that now is, to a certain John Maunsell, formerly parson of the same church, of which the one is dated in the 30th year of his reign.[1] This charter was conceded and confirmed by the said King, for himself and his heirs, to his beloved and faithful John Maunsell, parson of the church of Wigan, that his town of Wigan should be a borough for ever; that the burgesses of the same borough should have a Merchant-Guild, with a hanse, and all the liberties and free customs to that guild belonging; and that no one who is not of that guild should make any merchandize in the aforesaid borough except by the will of the same burgesses. He also conceded to the same burgesses and their heirs, that they should have sok,[2] sak,[3]
- ↑ According to the printed copy of the Wigan charters in the Wigan Free Library, this charter was dated at Wodestok, on the 26th of August, 30 Hen. III. (1246).
- ↑ Sok, or socage, was a tenure of lands by which a man was enfeoffed freely, or in fee simple, without any military service, relief, ward, or marriage, paying only to the lord a stated rent in money or provisions.
- ↑ Sak was the privilege or franchise, enjoyed by the lord of a manor of determining in his own local court the disputes of his tenants; so that in this case the men of Wigan would be tried by their own townsmen.
delivered on the morrow of St. John the Baptist (June 25), 2 Edw. I. (though it is recorded among the pleas of the 9th year of that reign, viz. 9 Edw. I. Rot. 5): and to this record a foot-note is appended to the effect that in Michaelmas Term, 23 Edw. III. (Coram Rege Roll, 21), this judgment was reversed by reason of errors, and the King was adjudged to have his action against Robert de Langeton, cousin and heir of the said Robert Banastre, which the King's grandfather had against the aforesaid Robert Banastre. From which it appears that it was King Edward I. who had claimed the advowson against Banastre in 1277. It will be seen hereafter that the King eventually restored the patronage to the Langtons.
